I think I'm the only person in The Escapist office who doesn't hate the third Sam Raimi Spider-Man film. Nevertheless, cramming Venom and Sandman in the same movie might have killed the franchise enough to warrant a prompt reboot, but what I've seen of Andrew Garfield - who you might recognize from The Social Network - there doesn't seem to be a compelling reason to see his Amazing Spider-Man over Tobey Maguire's Peter Parker. These three clips unlocked from codes found in Kellogg's breakfast cereals through a promotion and promptly uploaded to YouTube by a Spanish speaking gentleman don't change that first impression.

In the first bit, Garfield is awakened on a New York City subway car and jumps up to grab the roof, frightening innocent commuters in the process. How did he get away with that without wearing his mask? And why was he asleep on the subway? Doesn't Peter Parker know that's illegal? So many questions.

The second clip is supposed to be funny, with Spider-Man in full regalia toying with a crook by sticking him to a wall with webbing. The sneezing gag is pretty funny, I suppose, but there's something off about Garfield's smarmy delivery.

The final clip repeats an age-old joke but not very well. Unused to his super-human strength, Peter Parker can't even brush his teeth without smashing the tube, ripping off the faucet and finally the door knob. I don't have a problem with reusing good sight gags, but Sam Raimi basically did the exact same thing in the first Spider-Man with Tobey Maguire fumbling around his bedroom.

Here's a free tip for Marc Webb on directing The Amazing Spider-Man: If you're going to remake a movie, don't directly steal scenes from the previous director's interpretation.

This is like that parplexing hulk remake, that went into production the SAME YEAR as the release of the OTHER hulk movie, and were both ABOUT the genesis of the Hulk. So it was essentially the same movie, released twice, but with a different subplot. It was so weird...

This is a needless remake! Raimi's movies were completely and utterly demonstrably fine! Sure the third one tripped at the last hurdle. But it's too soon!

The smarmy tone does kind've give off a creepy vibe, almost sounding cruel in a way. That said, one of the few things I really missed from the Raimi Spidermans were the one-liners: it was funny, sure, but there was something charming about SM's banter in the cartoons and comics. This might be the only thing that actually makes me want to see this...maybe.

OK I'm with you on not lifting from Raime's Spiderman and all. But by God if Bruce Campbell wants to do a cameo then Bruce Campbell should be able to do a cameo! First rule of the universe; Everything is better with Bruce Campbell in it. End of story. :)

Man thats disappointing. I really love Garfield as an actor, and I held onto my hope for this movie after the first trailer kind of blew. I'm still hopeful, but these clips didn't help. The second one was kind of amusing, as others have said, but overall it just isn't looking great.

Who knows. Guess we'll just have to wait for the release this summer.

(Also, ads in the captcha? The Escapist is addressing its financial problems in weird ways...)

There's really not enough here to pass any kind of judgement to be honest guys. Combine that with the frankly awful sound quality of the YouTube video and I'm not sure that there's really anything that can be said.

I didn't know we had started basing our entire opinion of movies less than 2 minutes of footage with poor sound quality, but hey there you go.

As for the "questions" raised by the first clip - haven't you ever fallen asleep on public transport before? Or find yourself waking with a jump for whatever reason? It's really not that outlandish a scene if you think about it.

But yeh, I also liked Spiderman 3, despite the fact I had heard so much bad press about it I went in expecting a complete travesty.

Terrible sound, with potentially multiple takes strung together (for the middle scene when he's stringing the guy up), and highly unlikely to be the final edit.

So yeah, no shit it doesn't look great.

Acting in the actual trailers seems fine. And yes, those are obviously highlights strung together in short succession, but then this leak is hardly representative either.

We may as well be sitting around and complaining that clips of characters being animated for a game makes the final product out to be a little shitty, because there's no textures or music, and all the voice work is filler, and some of the animations don't look real yet.

Nooners:Bleeahhhhhhhh....not really liking this at all.This guy just seems like more of a jerkass than Toby MacGuire's Spidey.

Well MacGuire's was (and I believe this is the scientific term) a massive pussy, so that's not exactly difficult or surprising.

Something about just how easily that bathroom fell apart didn't make it look like super strength at all but just bad luck in a very poorly constructed bathroom. At least TRY and make it look like there's some extra force there....

Cheery Lunatic:Well Jesus Christ guys, most of you guys sound determined to hate the movie, and came in looking at the clips from that perspective.

Realize this is less than two minutes worth of clips, so please, calm your balls.

That's the impression I got too.Mind you, I can't friggin' stand the 'original' trilogy and I'm actually really looking forward to this so maybe that's why I liked these clips. Saw absoloutely nothing wrong with them.Some people just seem to be scraping the bottom of the barrel for reasons to dislike these clips.'Spider-Man wouldn't do that to a criminal' - What comics have YOU been reading?'His stance is wrong' - Fucking what??

And if I may quote wikipedia regarding the cancelled Spider-Man 4:"Raimi also discussed his desire to upgrade Bruce Campbell from a cameo appearance to a significant role. It was reported in December 2009 that John Malkovich was in negotiations to play Vulture and that Anne Hathaway would play Felicia Hardy, though she would not have transformed into the Black Cat as in the comics. Instead, Raimi's Felicia was expected to become a new superpowered figure called the Vulturess"

Robert Ewing:This is like that parplexing hulk remake, that went into production the SAME YEAR as the release of the OTHER hulk movie, and were both ABOUT the genesis of the Hulk. So it was essentially the same movie, released twice, but with a different subplot. It was so weird...

This is a needless remake! Raimi's movies were completely and utterly demonstrably fine! Sure the third one tripped at the last hurdle. But it's too soon!

A remake in 20 or 30 years I can understand, but why now!?

Hammeroj:I can see the "too easy" line as a little chuckle-worthy, but really, this reeks of nothing but 'meh'.

And I don't like this Garfield guy at all. Didn't see anything special about him in Social Network, and seriously not seeing Spider-Man in him.

Fuck it, I'll be honest. Looks like shit.

Robert Ewing:A remake in 20 or 30 years I can understand, but why now!?

Because Spider-man 2 and 3 broke box office records, and because, allegedly, Raimi decided not to work on the fourth movie after too much meddling by Sony.

Also the rights to spider-man were about to go back to Marvel and Sony were afraid that:A: They would do a better job, and looking at their movies so far they probebly would doB: They were afraid that Marvel would put him in The Avengers and make it an even bigger hit than it already will be.